Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Report] Canucks announce coaching staff updates

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

If it was ownership that intervened to bring Clark back, does that not cause you concern about management? 

no because Clarks deal goes beyond current management ones. Ownership has to deal with Clark if Jim isn't renewed, e.g. so I'm sure they wanted to see a solid plan and reasoning for a 5 year deal. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

It kind of cuts both ways, though, Jimmy.

 

You also have many posters here (I’d say a greater number, when it comes to CDC, than the “haters”), who are so heavily invested in years of Benning love and defending this regime, that they can’t seem to admit when mistakes are made or when unwise or unnecessary risks being are taken.

 

If you listen to Clark today, it’s pretty clear that he did in fact have a deadline in his mind, the Canucks did miss that deadline, and Clark was preparing to move on. 
 

The Canucks came hard in the end, and they got it done.

 

It’s funny that today we’re seeing Kevin Woodley quotes in these threads and posters using Woodley as a source because he said something positive about management being “progressive.”

 

It’s not that long ago that many were calling Woodley a liar and “fake news,” because he was saying that the Canucks were risking losing Clark by waiting as long as they had.

 

And as it turns out, pretty much everything Woodley reported was, in fact, accurate.

 

Clark had a deadline. Clark had great belief in himself, what he was worth, and how he deserved to be treated. When the deadline passed, and nothing was getting done, Clark and his family started planning for the next chapter, leaving Vancouver, and working for another NHL team.

 

Woodley always said that Clark wanted to stay in Vancouver, loved living here, was happy in his role, had great relationships with the goalies, enjoyed the work he was doing, and wanted to continue here. If the Canucks had been willing to work out an extension earlier, it likely would have been a very easy and stress-free negotiation, and probably Clark would have accepted a simply roll-over of his official duties and title, with a stardard timeline, synchronized with the GM’s contract, and the two year term eventually given to the other coaches.

 

But after the Canucks waited, Woodley said (and quite a while back) that Clark would probably up his ask, and the Canucks would need to offer something like 5 years, and a larger role, with a new title, and more clearly defined responsibilities and control over the goaltending department, if Clark were to accept an extension this late.

 

And that’s exactly what Clark got.

 

I don’t know of anyone who thinks it’s a bad thing that Clark re-signed, is here for another 5 years, and is now Director of Goatending, and addition to head goalie coach. 
 

My position was always that the team should pay Clark whatever he wants and give him whatever role and title he asks for. I’m very happy with the extension.

 

But good results don’t necessarily mean good processes.

 

I think it was a mistake to make Clark wait, and one that could have cost the team dearly. Had they not been willing to step up with a big offer and give Clark everything he could possibly ask for, it’s quite possible he’d have walked.

 

And I said from day one that letting Clark walk would have been a brutal unforced error. I stand by that.

 

It didn’t happen, and I’m thankful. I give the team credit for getting it done. And I’m thrilled with the Clark extension.


But I don’t think I’m being a “hater” when I maintain that the team made the process much more difficult than it needed to be, and took on much greater risk than necessary.

 

It’s also funny how, back when there was legitimate uncertainty over whether or not Clark would be extended, there were several posters trying to bend the narrative is countless different ways that sought to shift the blame off of management, and place it firmly on Ian Clark. I saw posts about how Clark wasn’t happy here, how he wanted to live in the USA, how he wanted a new challenge, etc. And also posts where Clark was cast as a villain, his ego was too big, his demands too high, he was a whiner, he was “pissy” (yeah, somebody said it), and he was just being too difficult. It seemed like people were brainstorming the narrative, such that, if Clark left, they’d have a story ready that placed all the blame on Clark, and none on management or ownership.

 

I’m also not buying this new narrative that the reason Clark’s extension took this long was that they were working hard on creating the new goaltending department.

 

Clark himself has stated that his job hasn’t really changed, just his title, and the clarity of his role, responsibilities, and authority, within the organization.

 

So it’s not like they’ve been working to create a new department all season and it just took a long time to put everything together, and that’s why Clark’s extension took until the eleventh hour to get finalized.

 

Let’s not forgot that, just back in May, Benning’s job was under review, and it really wasn’t even clear if he would survive beyond this season.

 

(Remember that Benning, with 2 years left on his contract, was only told on May 18th of this year than he’d actually be returning next season.)

 

And let’s also not forget that Benning was basically not permitted to start negotiations until after ownership decided that he was coming back.

 

The coaching extensions and hirings came together fairly quickly. 
 

Ownership was waiting because they weren’t sure who they wanted back for 2021-22, both on the management and coaching side.

 

And for that reason, I give JB a pass, when it comes to the delays, because I’m almost certain Benning would have acted quicker (he even hinted at this several times), if ownership had actually empowered him to do so. But he wasn’t really given the green light until mid/late May, so that’s the main reason we waited.

 

With Clark, however, I think ownership should have recognized the value of a rather unique asset, and split the goaltending coach extension off from the decisions on the main coaching staff, and empowered Benning to make the deal much sooner.

 

I can understand why they waited on Green and the other coaching staff, and I have never really been critical of their process in that regard. Changes were needed (and I’ve been an absolute cheerleader when it comes to praising the new hires, in Shaw and Gustafson).

 

I’m really not a hater. People may disagree, but I try to be very fair in my criticisms. I think the Clark extension was a very good result from a pretty bad process, and I mostly blame ownership for that, since they basically took it out of Benning’s hands, for most of this season.

 

 

 

thats all a very reasonable way to look at things. The only thing I'd disagree with, or maybe more accurately put some context on, is why ownership was waiting. We didn't know if there would be a season, and then if there was if it would include people in the stands. As soon as that became clear all of the management decisions have come pretty quickly. So thinking about it from an owners pov, if you dont know what your financial picture will look like its pretty hard to make commitments about extensions.

 

Jim would also have known Clarks position was to stay, and I do think some clarity around a 5 year deal would have been needed to convince ownership to agree to such a long deal.

 

The person I was referring to has a severe anti-Benning bent, it colours everything the guy posts and its tiresome. 

 

  • Hydration 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has it ever occurred to certain know-it-alls in here that the financial uncertainty surrounding the league played a role in the delay of getting some contractual things done ? Surely knowledge of things that will affect revenue forecasts is relevant to both sides understanding what constitutes a fair deal, right? Or maybe they did drag their heels; either way it is something to at least take into consideration.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I suppose. Certainly, the pandemic threw a wrench into things and made for a very strange year, and one I hope we never see repeated in our lifetimes.

 

But there was always going to be a team next year, and they were willing to go ahead and do millions of dollars in player extensions, even though it’s much more common practice to leave players late, versus non-cap staff.

 

Like I said, waiting on Green and the staff made sense, as there was a need for review, and their performance wasn’t such that they should be guaranteed re-hires.

 

But Clark, for me, was always different. He’s world class. Unlikely we could ever do better. It just doesn’t make sense to me to play chicken with an asset like that. You lock them up, ASAP. And worry about the bottom line somewhere else.

 

Plus, while I’m sure Clark is very well compensated (probably even more so now), he’s nowhere near the salary of a Demko or even a Pearson, who they had no problem re-signing earlier than needed (obviously, Demko was a necessity, but I’d also put Clark in the same category, but Pearson, not so much ;)).

 

Anyway, just my take.

 

As for certain posters with anti-Benning bents, I’d say that cuts both ways too. And if I’m right about who I think you’re referring too, I actually find that poster’s arguments more well reasoned and evidence based than many of the worst offenders on the other side.

 

I try to stay in the middle, but with CDC being so firmly in the pro-Benning camp, and so many people with an almost MAGA level cultish support of this manager (I’ve truly never seen anything like it in my years as fan of this team), I tend to think we could use a few more “haters,” even if just to keep this place honest.

 

Just my opinion, of course, and flak jacket is going on, as I await the replies. :lol:

thats funny, wouldn't it be MCGA? 

 

I don't see many of those tbh. I think the line is more around whether or not you see Jim's tenure as a "7 year" rebuild or two separate team building attempts, one to extend the Sedin's chances and then the actual rebuild. 

 

I also don't see Clark as Jims "failure" if we're going to label waiting his fault, thats clearly on ownership not Jim.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

0n the topic of staff changes, I was Just wondering how Leafs fans feel after Shanahan moved Lou Lamoriello out a few years back.

I think Lou is still ahead of the game as it develops,

seems others , like the Leafs,  just wannabe

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

thats funny, wouldn't it be MCGA? 

 

I don't see many of those tbh. I think the line is more around whether or not you see Jim's tenure as a "7 year" rebuild or two separate team building attempts, one to extend the Sedin's chances and then the actual rebuild. 

 

I also don't see Clark as Jims "failure" if we're going to label waiting his fault, thats clearly on ownership not Jim.

 

 

 

 

What is it they say? If you don’t think it’s a cult, you’re probably in the cult. :lol:

 

I don’t mean you, Jimmy. There are just some posts and threads where things sometimes start to feel a bit culty to me.

 

And just for fun, I had a look at this article: https://blog.usejournal.com/10-signs-youre-probably-in-a-cult-1921eb5a3857

 

I’d say CDC hits on around 7/10, at least when it comes to some of the pro-Benning crowd. ;) 
 

(All in fun, guys. I don’t begrudge anyone for their unwavering faith in Benning. I kind of envy it, much the same way I sometimes envy religious faith. It’s not my bag, but to each their own. Just so long as we all keep it civil, there’s room for haters, lovers, and everything in between. :))

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

0n the topic of staff changes, I was Just wondering how Leafs fans feel after Shanahan moved Lou Lamoriello out a few years back.

I think Lou is still ahead of the game as it develops,

seems others , like the Leafs,  just wannabe

 

Mark Hunter also left at the same time, who also took a ton of experience along with him.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/9/2021 at 1:56 PM, PhillipBlunt said:

Shaw worked in St. Louis and Columbus. Solid defensive systems implemented there that have worked quite well. It looks as though he might be the new defense coach as I don't think he's ever run or strategized a power play. 

 

Who, then is running the power play in place of Brown? 

The Twins?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

funny that today we’re seeing Kevin Woodley quotes in these threads and posters using Woodley as a source because he said something positive about management being “progressive.”

 

It’s not that long ago that many were calling Woodley a liar and “fake news,” because he was saying that the Canucks were risking losing Clark by waiting as long as they had.

Well, I think I was the first one to mention Woodley’s comments re: Clark in this topic which was also (I believe) the first time I’ve mentioned Woodley in any topic. I don’t think we’ve seen any of the people who may have criticized Woodley in the past now using his words to prop up Benning. 
 

I have previously mentioned Friedman’s words on Clark (things he said during an intermission a couple weeks ago). The gist of what he said re: Clark was that Clark was his own guy who marches to the beat of his own drum. Said Clark was well aware of how sought after he’d be and that if he left it would be because it’s what he wanted to do (from memory).
 

 

At the end of the day I think there’s just way more griping about this particular news bit than there needs to be or really should be. I know there’s some information on the topic that I haven’t read but I think Benning was probably over the moon to sign Clark for 5 years. 
 

And a certain somebody being the objective one on these boards? The guy who said the Toffoli trade was worse than the Sergachev trade? There’s legitimate criticisms to be made of the Toffoli trade but cmon. 

Edited by Sean Monahan
  • Hydration 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

I think it's important to understand that "negotiations" for new contracts and "deadlines" are often a game of cat and mouse.

 

If Clark really had a deadline set in stone, that would mean he'd already be gone.  Deadlines are used as a pressure tactic and the fact that he "increased" his ask meant the deadline was more of a tool than a line in the sand.  

 

My ex negotiated contracts for a long time and the process is one that isn't always what it appears to be the casual observer or those on the outside.  It's a game of poker that even involves some bluffing.  Don't get me wrong, that game really could have backfired (think Toffoli) but it didn't.  So to dwell on it really is pointless.  He's re-signed, so obviously they did something right to keep him here.

 

I'm not "pro Benning" I'm more anti drama and dragging out things that we need to move forward on.  I was ok either way, but those who wanted Benning gone often don't give any credit or move past that.  They stay stuck there.  The pro Benning crowd isn't usually one that says he's faultless...it's more that we accept the things we cannot change.  Water under the bridge.  Dead horse.  All that stuff. 

 

This statement (quoted) can be pretty evenly appliedon the anti Benning side (too)....but it's declared as "passionate fans who want the team to do well"

 

For me, it says something to be open minded on both sides and not staunchly set with your feet dug in without ever moving past that stance. 

 

It's also knowing that it's pretty hard to nail every move and be perfect.  But, seeing if they learn from past mistakes will be a big thing for me. 

 

I just want to be positive about the future and, at some point, that becomes a choice we all have.  

Deb i just don't like it when people getting paid huge dollars fail at a basic part of they're job like the task of resigning a player (Toffoli) that everyone new was a great fit at a great price and a proven scorer. We all saw what had to be done, it was a plain as the nose on every ones face, players like him don't come around very often, look at what hes done to Montreal. This is why i get so angry and don't want to support this man. Oh and don't forget we lost Madden in the process and the farther the Habs go and the better Tof continues to play the worse it looks on Benning. I'm sorry if i can't shake it like some of you here but it really makes me mad with someone like him at the helm.

Edited by Bure2Win
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

I have previously mentioned Friedman’s words on Clark (things he said during an intermission a couple weeks ago). The gist of what he said re: Clark was that Clark was his own guy who marches to the beat of his own drum. Said Clark was well aware of how sought after he’d be and that if he left it would be because it’s what he wanted to do. 

I heard that interview too.

 

Thing is, sometimes people just "move on" because they start to feel stagnant and uninspired....they need a change of scenery.  No one's tied to a team/city forever and respecting someone's right to ponder their future may also factor in.  Not pressuring them and showing respect for the decision making process.

 

They also stated that there are good goaltending coaches out there and seemed to project a "no panic" message that likely helped their case.  Desperation isn't what you want to see in negotiations.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Bure2Win said:

Deb i just don't like it when people getting paid huge dollars fail at a basic part of they're job like the task of resigning a player (Toffoli) that everyone new was a great fit at a great price and a proven scorer. We all saw what had to be done, it was a plain as the nose on every ones face, players like him don't come around very often, look at what hes done to Montreal. This is why i get so angry and don't want to support this man. Oh and don't forget we lost Madden in the process and the farther the Habs go and the better Tof continues to play the worse it looks on Benning. I'm sorry if i can't shake it like some of you here but it really makes me mad with someone like him at the helm.

Trust me, the Toffoli thing stings for me too.  I get it, for sure.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, debluvscanucks said:

I heard that interview too.

 

Thing is, sometimes people just "move on" because they start to feel stagnant and uninspired....they need a change of scenery.  No one's tied to a team/city forever and respecting someone's right to ponder their future may also factor in.  Not pressuring them.   

 

They also stated that there are good goaltending coaches out there and seemed to project a "no panic" message that likely helped their case.  Desperation isn't what you want to see in negotiations.

It sounds like we know now that Clark’s preference was to stay here in Vancouver. Good to hear. Perhaps it’s been reported, but I imagine the holdup was on ownership’s end. If Clark was willing to sign a longer term contract you think that would be a pretty quick and easy negotiation, right? I can’t imagine why Benning wouldn’t want to keep Clark around, especially longer term. I therefore deduce the holdup was due to ownership’s green lighting of any deal. 
 

 

Ultimately I’m happy Clark’s here to stay and excited to see what he can do with this new goaltending department. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Googlie said:

Duh - stupid me.  That's what comes of copying a link, then doing other things for an hour before pasting, during which time I forgot who the link was about !!!

Hey I got two bags for asking that question

I appreciate an honest/earnest answer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...